Peter AckroydRebellion: The History of England from James I to the Glorious Revolution

Nothing new to add from my previous reviews. History marches on. The quality of writing is maintained. It is interesting to see what was happening in the UK when a young colonial America was forming and how they would end up clashing. Sorry, I'm getting ahead of the history. Spoiler alert.

The turbulent 17th century in England required a strong king and a leader of men. The four descendants of Mary Queen of Scots proved to have none of that in them. It is ironic that Mary lost her head to Elizabeth, but her son became king after Elizabeth's death.James I was not a Hollywood image of a king. He was a man prone to slobbering, and "playing with his codpiece". Coming from Scotland, and the only child of Mary Queen of Scots, he brought much of that baggage with him, and with all four of these monarchs, he fought continuously for money that was not readily offered for his fine tastes. The one thing he is most remembered for was the creation of the King James Bible. That in itself is a most interesting story, and the author could have presented much more information on this.His son Charles assumed the throne on the death of his father. Charles was a man of stubborn will, who thought way too much of himself, and foolishly aligned his throne with people not at all popular, such as the Duke of Buckingham. He had a running battle with a Parliament that increasingly sought to strip him of real power. It was so bad that Charles dissolved Parliament in 1629 for a long eleven years. It was only in April of 1640 that it was again summoned because the king needed money and the reception to this was not friendly. There was also great religious conflicts at this time. The dour Presbyterian Scots demanded no toleration of Catholicism and no acceptance of the more formal Church of England which infuriated Charles. To shorten the story, royalists and backers of parliament gathered armies. Charles I eventually was defeated and at the end of January 1649, his head was chopped off. For a period of time Oliver Cromwell assumed more of a military dictatorship, and eventually, they sent for Charles II, who had been living in Europe to assume the throne. He did and proved to be just as incompetent as his father and grandfather. With his death and no male heir, his brother James II took the crown and by 1688, he was toppled in the Glorious Revolution. It didn't help that James was Catholic which was a clear conflict with the majority of the people and those in power.There are many other good parts of the book. The author brings up information on the arts, the way people lived, and toward the latter part of the 17th century, the economic progress of England in so many ways that brought not only wealth, but general improvements in life for the English people.The book is very readable with generally short chapters that keep you moving along. There is a much going on during this period and Ackroyd does most of it justice in a fair manner. It could easily be four volumes or more, but nobody would read it, so I recommend it. Even if you have limited background in the history of this period, you will gain knowledge from this work and I thank the author for it.

“Rebellion,” Peter Ackroyd’s third book of five in his splendid history of England, focuses on the feckless Stuart monarchy (James I, Charles I and II, James II) along with the six years of the Cromwellian Protectorate (1653-1659). This is the historical struggle of representative governance against England’s monarchical legacy complicated by the “push pull” of religion, Protestantism versus Catholicism, in an age of burgeoning mercantilism and scientific achievement.Superbly written, wide ranging, humorous at times, Rebellion’s most entertaining chapters are when Ackroyd breaks from recounting the monarchical madness to the writings of John Milton, the genius of Isaac Newton, the diaries of Samuel Pepys, the bawdiness of plays at Drury Lane, life on the streets of London for the commoners and the many mistresses of Charles II; all gloriously ending in 1688 when James II fled to France.

Peter Ackroyd's Civil War: The History of England Volume III is the best, most literate and comprehensive work in existence on thecomplex state of England, politically, intellectually, and socially in the 17th century. This is not some obscure subject, as it concernsthe very hinge upon which the door closed on the Renaissance and opened to our modern period. The entire spectrum of this erahas been the close study of mine since before college and until now that I am an octogenarian I read this book with delight. I would have expected nothing less from Peter Ackroyd. And if you are unfamiliar with his nonfiction, fiction, and arts criticism,a world of good reading awaits you. In our advanced state of dumbed down or pedantic drivel, Ackroyd's golden pen and laser mindearns him the title of man of letters, the best since Aldous Huxley.Lee Hopkins

This book is one of a three book series about certain periods in English history. Rebellion covers a tumultous and very unique period. It begins with the reign of James I, and ends with deposition and of his grandson, James II. All of the facinating characters of the period are brought to llife thru the author's excellent prose, including Charles I, Cromwell, and Charles II.The times reflected a long struggle between absolute monarchy and Parliment, highlighted by a bloody civil war, and the killing of a king. The book also captures the tenor of the times regarding the religious intolerance which played such a critical importance in the unfolding of events.The central character of the book is Oliver Cromwell, who evolved from defender of the rights of men into England's only dictator and as much of a despot as the king he executed.Along the way, the author provides the reader with background and perspective by including aspects of the cultural and social life of the period, including Shakespeare's works, the poetry of John Donne and Milton and Thomas Hobbes's great philosophical treatise, Leviathan.I found this book informative, thought provoking, entertaining extremely well written and balanced. The only issue I had was that I was unfamilier many of the terms and references that were employed by the author. The book is clearly written for a British audience. However I did enjoy the book and intend to read the other two, which is probably the best endorsement I can give.

Nice book, good size pocket book and good size text for easy reading. Highly recommend.

The book arrived promptly and in very good nick. The contents thereof are the marvelous and strange histories of England from the time of James I through the Glorious Revolution as seen through the very human prism of Peter Ackroyd's mind.

Non si possono che condividere le recensioni molto positive che questo testo ha ottenuto nei paesi di lingua inglese. Come compendio storico sul periodo successivo alla morte della monarca Elisabetta I, un periodo di sconvolgimenti difficilmente prevedibili per la Gran Bretagna e la sua istituzione monarchica, il testo è encomiabile, soprattutto per lo stile svelto e coinvolgente di Ackroyd. L'unica riserva che mi permetto di segnalare riguarda il titolo, che considero almeno in parte fuorviante, l'opera infatti più che trattare della Guerra Civile Inglese, è un resoconto autorevole quanto godibile del XVII secolo inglese, quello dell'ascesa e caduta della dinastia Stuart, e della loro epopea maestosa e tragica che li portò dai massimi onori all'indegnità del ceppo del boia per poi recuperare il potere e nuovamente perderlo a favore di un sovrano straniero autore di un vero e proprio golpe. Fatta questa doverosa precisazione, il libro merita di essere raccomandato senza riserva alcuna.

Peter Ackroyd manages to give the big picture - what the leeches (kings, queens, earls etc.) at the top of society did or did not do - but also writes about how it was to be a normal member of society. Better than any detective story. I'M looking forward to volume 4.

I read it for enjoyment. It is quite amazing to see how difficult it was for the Royalists and Parliamentarians to communicate and negotiate with one another. Reminds one of the situation today in Canada and the US.